Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login

Site Notices
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 2
Posted: 1/17/2015 9:05:19 AM EST
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/texas-pro-gun-group-recreates-charlie-hebdo-attack-article-1.2081534

"A Texas pro-gun group organized a re-enactment of the Charlie Hebdo massacre in a bizarre bid to test what would have happened if one of the murdered scribes was armed.

"But the experiment set up by the group The Truth About Guns backfired — in no scenario was the “armed civilian” able to take out both “terrorists.”

"Perhaps even more disappointing for the pro-gun activists, only one of the volunteers playing the role of the armed civilian even managed to survive — by fleeing the scene."

Comments?
Link Posted: 1/17/2015 9:07:09 AM EST
Comment: Better to be armed than not.
Link Posted: 1/17/2015 9:10:30 AM EST
[Last Edit: 1/17/2015 9:14:48 AM EST by Skg_Mre_Lght]
Link Posted: 1/17/2015 9:11:40 AM EST
Originally Posted By LibertyShip:
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/texas-pro-gun-group-recreates-charlie-hebdo-attack-article-1.2081534

"A Texas pro-gun group organized a re-enactment of the Charlie Hebdo massacre in a bizarre bid to test what would have happened if one of the murdered scribes was armed.

"But the experiment set up by the group The Truth About Guns backfired — in no scenario was the “armed civilian” able to take out both “terrorists.”

"Perhaps even more disappointing for the pro-gun activists, only one of the volunteers playing the role of the armed civilian even managed to survive — by fleeing the scene."

Comments?
View Quote



Sounds about right. Buncha faggots.
Link Posted: 1/17/2015 9:14:55 AM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By Skg_Mre_Lght:
You are fucked when going against a group of trained riflemen as a CCW holder.
View Quote


Truth. They have superior firepower and the element of surprise. Carrying a concealed weapon is more about the comfort mindset, anyway. In actuality, the likelihood of returning fire in such a scenario, and successfully driving the assailants back, is slim to none. Maybe if everybody was armed, had training, and had a plan, but who really does that?
Link Posted: 1/17/2015 9:18:02 AM EST
So the obvious thing to do is go unarmed and have no chance of self defense?


Fucking idiots.
Link Posted: 1/17/2015 9:18:49 AM EST
From Wikipedia:

The Saint James Church massacre was a massacre perpetrated on St James Church in Kenilworth, Cape Town on 25 July 1993 by four cadres of the Azanian People's Liberation Army (APLA). 11 members of the congregation were killed and 58 wounded. In 1998 the attackers were granted amnesty for their participation by the Truth and Reconciliation Commission.

The attack occurred during the Sunday evening service. Sichumiso Nonxuba, Bassie Mkhumbuzi, Gcinikhaya Makoma and Tobela Mlambisa approached the church in a vehicle stolen by Mlambisa and Makoma beforehand. Nonxuba, who commanded the unit, and Makoma entered the church armed with M26 hand grenades and R4 assault rifles.[1] They threw the grenades and then opened fire on the congregation, killing 11 and wounding 58.[2] One member of the congregation, Charl van Wyk, who wrote a book about the event (Shooting Back), returned fire with a .38 special revolver, wounding one of the attackers. At this point they fled the church. Mkhumbuzi had been ordered to throw four petrol bombs into the church following the shooting, but abandoned this intention as all four fled in the vehicle.[2]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saint_James_Church_massacre

Link Posted: 1/17/2015 9:19:13 AM EST
And the unarmed people had zero chance to defend themselves (as opposed to 5% or whatever)
Link Posted: 1/17/2015 9:19:25 AM EST
I vote sub gun CCW

Link Posted: 1/17/2015 9:19:39 AM EST
Originally Posted By LibertyShip:
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/texas-pro-gun-group-recreates-charlie-hebdo-attack-article-1.2081534

"A Texas pro-gun group organized a re-enactment of the Charlie Hebdo massacre in a bizarre bid to test what would have happened if one of the murdered scribes was armed.

"But the experiment set up by the group The Truth About Guns backfired — in no scenario was the “armed civilian” able to take out both “terrorists.”

"Perhaps even more disappointing for the pro-gun activists, only one of the volunteers playing the role of the armed civilian even managed to survive — by fleeing the scene."

Comments?
View Quote


There are some situations where, no matter what you do, you are fucked. I'd say this was one of those situations. Not surprised with the results. TTAG should have seen the results coming. Doesn't take a brain surgeon to figure it out.
Link Posted: 1/17/2015 9:20:59 AM EST
People react differently when being shot at by real guns vs paint guns.
Link Posted: 1/17/2015 9:21:00 AM EST
The actual Paris attack, it was detailed the gunman took time to line up men and women on opposite sides of the office walls before calling out names and shooting them.

Sounds like someone with better than just basic handgun skills could maybe get off a pair of double taps, especially with the shooters not expecting someone else to be armed?
Link Posted: 1/17/2015 9:23:04 AM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By EasTexan:
So the obvious thing to do is go unarmed and have no chance of self defense?


Fucking idiots.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By EasTexan:
So the obvious thing to do is go unarmed and have no chance of self defense?


Fucking idiots.


This makes the case for OCing rifles...
Snowboots, save us!!

All horseshit; attackers with a plan have a big advantage.
Link Posted: 1/17/2015 9:26:34 AM EST
Still a success. If I'm going down, I'm taking some of those fuckers with me. There will be no easy fight if I'm involved, regardless of whether I die or not.
Link Posted: 1/17/2015 9:27:54 AM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By EasTexan:
So the obvious thing to do is go unarmed and have no chance of self defense?


Fucking idiots.
View Quote

The answer is to ban guns. They're useless.
Link Posted: 1/17/2015 9:30:46 AM EST
Link Posted: 1/17/2015 9:30:54 AM EST
The "experiment" didn't account for other armed citizens outside of the target. Ie, if that person filming from the rooftop had a firearm, at least some lives could have been saved.

Secondly, the media doesn't understand that "Die Hard" isn't realistic. One man with pistol versus 2 trained men with rifles will typically not end well. I did also note the wording of the article... Not one of the ccw shooters were able to stop BOTH shooters. There were a couple scenarios where one bg was hit. That could make a significant difference.

Many variables are involved and anything can happen, but the truth of the matter is that having a ccw gives you a fighting chance, having no ccw puts your fate in whatever the bg decides for it to be.
Link Posted: 1/17/2015 9:32:19 AM EST
[Last Edit: 1/17/2015 9:33:52 AM EST by DRich]
The shooters in Paris knew they were facing unarmed office workers. I'd imagine that if the shooters had expected the possibility of armed resistance (from the office workers...obviously they expected a police response in short order), they wouldn't have fucked around with splitting people up and just commenced with shooting everyone the instant they walked in.

Much different scenario.
Link Posted: 1/17/2015 9:32:44 AM EST
I also noticed that only one person was armed with a ccw. Try that here in ga and chances are there would be more than one pistol in that room.
Link Posted: 1/17/2015 9:33:20 AM EST
this whole mindset on the left is due to learning that it is OK to lose and competition is wrong.
Link Posted: 1/17/2015 9:35:26 AM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By robplumm:
People react differently when being shot at by real guns vs paint guns.
View Quote


This. The "attackers" in the test knew no real bullets were coming and there is no way they acted the same as they would have if the bullets were real. This is like the difference between playing poker with real money and for fun with no money involved. The CCW would have probably still lost, but he would have had a slim chance to make the attackers retreat and a better chance of taking one of them with him and possible saving a couple of the others lives.
Link Posted: 1/17/2015 9:37:51 AM EST
[Last Edit: 1/17/2015 9:54:37 AM EST by LibertyShip]
Much more video here. Interesting.




Looks like the game is 1CCW handgun vs. 2 trained riflemen. Some guys did ok, all things considered. Too bad the story broke the way it did without analysis.

I can't tell if defender shots were discounted due to "body armor" on the attackers.
Link Posted: 1/17/2015 9:39:15 AM EST
[Last Edit: 1/17/2015 9:39:49 AM EST by toothandnail]
I only saw about 4 max in the room, 2 the other time. The shooter has a tremendous advantage KNOWING they will shoot everybody on sight in this case.

Don't know if that's the way the CH shooting went down , but shooting 10-11 in quick succession without an armed defender getting a shot or two is less likely.

Either way, give me a chance vs cower like a whipped dog.

They better shoot me first.
Link Posted: 1/17/2015 9:42:41 AM EST
It seems to me that even though defender was defeated the fact that he got at least one and caused the attack to play out longer is still a huge win. The police are now facing only one attacker who now has less ammo available.

If the police were afforded a couple more minutes response time then it is possible the other gunman would have been subdued or killed.
Link Posted: 1/17/2015 9:43:04 AM EST
Where were everyone's canned goods..?
Link Posted: 1/17/2015 9:45:06 AM EST
With the 9+ Jihadi training camps here in the US. We will soon see a real test.
Link Posted: 1/17/2015 9:48:09 AM EST
I'll be damned if I'll be executed without a fight even if it's with nothing more than my body. No man should shot down like a dog.
Link Posted: 1/17/2015 9:49:49 AM EST

Didnt the Sargent at Arms kill the guy in Canada with a pistol vs rifle?

And what if the guys filming on the roof were armed?
That 1 video where they shot the cop might not have occurred.
They didn't look like very hard targets in the street below. At the very least you could probably have delayed them or caused them to get in the car and haul ass.

Link Posted: 1/17/2015 9:49:54 AM EST
did they account for that guy having over watch and taking pics of them i think he could have at the very least dropped one.
Link Posted: 1/17/2015 9:53:35 AM EST
I believe the test is flawed. I read on another blog They only used 12 people. More than that involved. Results are skewed. Use a real building with 20-30 people. A building with nooks and cubicles and bathrooms and closets, etc. No accounting for that one armed person just around the corner getting ready to shoot while the terrorist is engaged and focused on what is in front of him. the advantage is still on the terrorist side due to a number of factors but I prefer to option to fight over waiting like sheep to get taken out...

uphill battle no matter how many citizens are armed. Pistol to a rifle fight. 2 somewhat trained individuals hellbent and focused on the task at hand.

I have read some Derp from that site previously. IMO.. They make a better effort than most but sometimes the BS is strong.
Link Posted: 1/17/2015 9:53:50 AM EST
I will take my chances Armed. this is no bank robbery where being unarmed and crying you have kids they will let you live.
Link Posted: 1/17/2015 10:01:41 AM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By m193:

The answer is to ban guns. They're useless.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By m193:
Originally Posted By EasTexan:
So the obvious thing to do is go unarmed and have no chance of self defense?


Fucking idiots.

The answer is to ban guns. They're useless.


I watched a youtube video where they performed a test on some college campus.
They gave a guy a handgun to conceal and had him sit at a table with a bunch of other people.

Then they had someone burst into the room and "start shooting". The guy with the handgun didn't even get his shirt pulled up to grab his handgun before he was "dead".

Their conclusion from running the test was that carrying a firearm was useless, which was exactly what they were going for.

The guy who was conceal carrying was not familiar with handguns, so that made it easier to make the exercise turn out the way they wanted it to.

It also showed me that even though you carry and practice often sometimes things are not going to happen the way you imagine they will.
Link Posted: 1/17/2015 10:03:47 AM EST
What about the lady who let them in the building? What if when she let them in, she grabbed a gun out of her purse, and was able to take them out from behind.

There were multiple points in which these asshats could have been taken out. Also when they were held up at the business, they let the business owner wander around the building without even watching him. He could have easily gotten his weapon, and taken them out or at least tried to.

It's all about increasing the odds against people like these, and as they were, they had 0% chance of defending themselves. Even a 5% chance is better than 0.
Link Posted: 1/17/2015 10:13:27 AM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By AR-10:


I watched a youtube video where they performed a test on some college campus.
They gave a guy a handgun to conceal and had him sit at a table with a bunch of other people.

Then they had someone burst into the room and "start shooting". The guy with the handgun didn't even get his shirt pulled up to grab his handgun before he was "dead".

Their conclusion from running the test was that carrying a firearm was useless, which was exactly what they were going for.

The guy who was conceal carrying was not familiar with handguns, so that made it easier to make the exercise turn out the way they wanted it to.

It also showed me that even though you carry and practice often sometimes things are not going to happen the way you imagine they will.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By AR-10:
Originally Posted By m193:
Originally Posted By EasTexan:
So the obvious thing to do is go unarmed and have no chance of self defense?


Fucking idiots.

The answer is to ban guns. They're useless.


I watched a youtube video where they performed a test on some college campus.
They gave a guy a handgun to conceal and had him sit at a table with a bunch of other people.

Then they had someone burst into the room and "start shooting". The guy with the handgun didn't even get his shirt pulled up to grab his handgun before he was "dead".

Their conclusion from running the test was that carrying a firearm was useless, which was exactly what they were going for.

The guy who was conceal carrying was not familiar with handguns, so that made it easier to make the exercise turn out the way they wanted it to.

It also showed me that even though you carry and practice often sometimes things are not going to happen the way you imagine they will.


Is that the one where they put him in a number of different environments class/court room?
Link Posted: 1/17/2015 10:15:23 AM EST
Link Posted: 1/17/2015 10:20:32 AM EST
[Last Edit: 1/17/2015 10:21:07 AM EST by urbanredneck]
Wasn't it Texas where a CCW holder tried to take on a shooter outside a courthouse? He was killed....but he did try to defend everyone that day...

Anyway, I think the scenario is a little off. Did the BGs in Paris sneak into the building or come in blazing? I thought they were shooting it up outside the building. That would give someone with a gun an opportunity to get ready. If they did sneak in, carry guy is at a disadvantage to start. Two trained rifleman attacking vs reactive defense. Most ranges don't help, not allowing quick draw point shooting and/or movement.

Best hopes would be lay down some fire to allow a get away. If lucky you might be able to take a BG out and recover his rifle....
Link Posted: 1/17/2015 10:21:43 AM EST
[Last Edit: 1/17/2015 10:25:29 AM EST by sherrick13]
My pistol is to help get me and mine out of the area. Not to save the day.

In any event it did NOT turn out exactly the same way. A gun shooting back always disrupts plans.
Link Posted: 1/17/2015 10:22:38 AM EST
That's cute. One specific scenario somehow disproves the idea of armed self-defense? lol
Link Posted: 1/17/2015 10:23:00 AM EST
Sometimes people die in car accidents, so you might as well not use a seat belt.

Sometimes the fire department can't save a home from total destruction, so you might as well throw away those fire extinguishers.
Link Posted: 1/17/2015 10:24:43 AM EST
id rather be armed.


Link Posted: 1/17/2015 10:25:17 AM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By urbanredneck:
Wasn't it Texas where a CCW holder tried to take on a shooter outside a courthouse? He was killed....but he did try to defend everyone that day...

Anyway, I think the scenario is a little off. Did the BGs in Paris sneak into the building or come in blazing? I thought they were shooting it up outside the building. That would give someone with a gun an opportunity to get ready. If they did sneak in, carry guy is at a disadvantage to start. Two trained rifleman attacking vs reactive defense. Most ranges don't help, not allowing quick draw point shooting and/or movement.

Best hopes would be lay down some fire to allow a get away. If lucky you might be able to take a BG out and recover his rifle....
View Quote
They had a lady key pad them in who worked in the building. She didn't want her or her daughter hurt so she let them inside.
Link Posted: 1/17/2015 10:26:49 AM EST
2 guys wearing mask carrying AK's had to cause a stir in the building, the real attackers had to have made their presence known before they got into the main kill zone?
Wouldn't the intended victims ( if they had a ccw) have had a few seconds to arm up before the terrorists entered the kill zone?
A couple of seconds to draw your weapon & take some cover can drastically change the outcome of a situation like this, no?
Link Posted: 1/17/2015 10:27:12 AM EST
[Last Edit: 1/17/2015 10:27:25 AM EST by Dr_Dickie]
An the outcome was improved by them being disarmed how?
Link Posted: 1/17/2015 10:27:36 AM EST
Link Posted: 1/17/2015 10:29:52 AM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History

I watched a youtube video where they performed a test on some college campus.
They gave a guy a handgun to conceal and had him sit at a table with a bunch of other people.

Then they had someone burst into the room and "start shooting". The guy with the handgun didn't even get his shirt pulled up to grab his handgun before he was "dead".

Their conclusion from running the test was that carrying a firearm was useless, which was exactly what they were going for.

The guy who was conceal carrying was not familiar with handguns, so that made it easier to make the exercise turn out the way they wanted it to.

It also showed me that even though you carry and practice often sometimes things are not going to happen the way you imagine they will.
View Quote



I've seen that one before, too. It was put on by NBC or some such network, and it was completely skewered to make the bad guy win every time.

They tried it with a few different people, none of whom were particularly proficient with firearms. They put the "good guy" in the same seat every time, so the "bad guy" knew exactly where the "good guy" was, and the "bad guy" knew that he was armed and knew ahead of time what the scenario was going to be. Hardly realistic at all.
Link Posted: 1/17/2015 10:30:27 AM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By netstorm:
They had a lady key pad them in who worked in the building. She didn't want her or her daughter hurt so she let them inside.
View Quote View All Quotes
View All Quotes
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By netstorm:
Originally Posted By urbanredneck:
Wasn't it Texas where a CCW holder tried to take on a shooter outside a courthouse? He was killed....but he did try to defend everyone that day...

Anyway, I think the scenario is a little off. Did the BGs in Paris sneak into the building or come in blazing? I thought they were shooting it up outside the building. That would give someone with a gun an opportunity to get ready. If they did sneak in, carry guy is at a disadvantage to start. Two trained rifleman attacking vs reactive defense. Most ranges don't help, not allowing quick draw point shooting and/or movement.

Best hopes would be lay down some fire to allow a get away. If lucky you might be able to take a BG out and recover his rifle....
They had a lady key pad them in who worked in the building. She didn't want her or her daughter hurt so she let them inside.

I'd bet they killed her anyway!
Link Posted: 1/17/2015 10:30:38 AM EST
Armed and untrained is as bad as unarmed. If you are going to carry, get training and practice regularly.
Link Posted: 1/17/2015 10:32:40 AM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By The_Beer_Slayer:
they had the drop on everyone, out gunned, out trained.

sometimes your just fucked.
View Quote


Agreed. It's a no win scenario.

It's worth pointing out that once, the CCW holder escaped. So, you don't wind up the hero. I'll take living and seeing another day vs. being put down like an animal.
Link Posted: 1/17/2015 10:33:18 AM EST
Here is an example of a combat vet who was always carrying being killed by an AR15 armed killer when taken by surprise. That OODA loop thing has to kick in.

http://www.star-telegram.com/news/local/crime/article5291919.html
Link Posted: 1/17/2015 10:34:42 AM EST
Discussion ForumsJump to Quoted PostQuote History
Originally Posted By KatSnatchFever:
Sometimes people die in car accidents, so you might as well not use a seat belt.

Sometimes the fire department can't save a home from total destruction, so you might as well throw away those fire extinguishers.
View Quote

Link Posted: 1/17/2015 10:40:32 AM EST
At this point "everyone" regardless of your viewpoint needs to be trained and have some level of self defense capability, firearms being the best. It needs to be acknowledge that we are in a world war of sorts. I don't generally talk like that but that is how I feel now.
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 2
Top Top